DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.68025#0169
ROYAL COMMISSION UPON DECENTRALIZATION.
163
and an Executive Council ; what is your reason for
that?—The Members of the Indian Civil Service
would be under proper control. It is very important
that this control should come from outside.
18331. You might have a Lieutenant-Governor from
outside ; if you had that, would you still want an
Executive Council ?—Yes, the Executive Councils
would be an essential thing to help him in adminis-
tration.
18332. Why do you think that the Head of the
Government requires advisers and colleagues ; is it
because you would get greater continuity of fpolicy ?
—Yes, there would be greater continuity of policy,
and his colleagues would help the Lieutenant-Governor
in duties which he alone could not be expected to
discharge.
18333. You mean you would get several minds look-
ing at the thing instead of one, and possibly a broader
point of view ?—That is my idea.
18334. You are not in favour of Advisory Councils
for District Officers ?—If what I have suggested be
accepted, there will be no necessity for Advisory
Councils.
18335. You would rather have an effective Advisory
Council for the whole province than a number of
small Advisory Councils dotted about all over the
province ?—Yes.
18336. .You might have a conflict of opinion among
the smaller Advisory Councils, and one might be in
conflict with the other?—Yes, and that would give
rise to disorder and difficulties whicln ls ns>t desirable
to introduce into the administration-
18337. If there was a question which provoked a
certain amount of conflict, you might have a number
of conflicting views sent up to the Government, and
the temptation might be to play off one against the
other ?—That is the reason why I suggested that the
central control should be properly representative.
18338. The Local Boards to-day have a certain
amount of money for roads ; do they spend that
money well?—Neither the Local Boards nor the Dis-
trict Boards spend their money well.
18339. Which spends it best ?—I should say it is
better spent by the Local Boards than by the District
Boards.
18340. In the case of the District Board there may
possibly be less supervision and therefore possibly
more leakage—is that what you mean ?—I fear so.
18341. Would that be an argument for giving greater
powers to the Local Boards ?—I think so.
18342. (Mr. Dutt.) You propose to abolish the
Divisional Commissioners and the Board of Revenue
and to substitute an Inspector-General at the head of
each department ? Would you tell us briefly what
would be gained by that arrangement ?—Strictly
speaking, the Board of Revenue as originally con-
stituted has ceased to exist long ago. These officers
are, as it were, channels by which certain reports and
resolutions pass and are recorded. If they did not
exist the members in charge of departments would
receive advice and reports from the Heads of Depart-
ments. Now you have got several steps—first the
District Board, then the Commissioner, then the Board
of Revenue and then the Government ; but according
to my suggestion the Governor with the Council would
get his report from the Head of the Department.
18343. You would do away with a lot of circum-
locution ?—Yes that is the gain ; we should get rid of
circumlocution which causes delay and lengthy writing,
the repetition of despatches and reports, and so forth.
Abbreviate work and secure efficiency—that is my
idea.
18344. Under your system would the administration
be as much in touch with the people as it ought to be,
or is supposed to be now ?—It would certainly be more
so than at present.
18345. One of the duties of the Divisional Commis-
sioner now is to supervise the work of the District
Officers under him ; would that be secured under the
scheme that you have recommended ?—Far more would
be secured ; you cannot expect a Divisional Commis-
sioner to be an expert in all departments; he is
only human. There are so many departments. A
Divisional Commissioner’s inspection cannot always be
very useful and satisfactory, but if these inspections
are made by the Heads of different Departments, that
would be an expert examination.
18346. You do not think that under your system the
administration would be too departmental and not
sufficiently human, too much the administration of
experts and not sufficiently the administration of men
in touch with the people ?—I believe they would be in
touch with the people.
18347. You say that provincial Governments should
have borrowing powers within certain limitations ;
you have not told us for what objects the provincial
Governments should be allowed to borrow ?—For the
improvement of general administration—not for the
construction of residential houses or for the improve-
ment of a ball-room, or anything of that sort.
18348. What do you mean by the improvement of
general administration ?—For irrigation purposes, for
sanitary purposes, or for educational purposes, or for
anything leading to the improvement of the country.
18349. Would you make it a rule that these loans
should be incurred under the sanction of the Govern-
ment of India on each occasion ?—Yes.
18350. At present provincial Governments can
borrow from the Government of India ?—Yes, but I
am not in favour of that.
18351. What is the advantage of the system which
you recommend in comparison with the present system
of the provincial Governments borrowing from the
Government of India ?—If the provincial Governments
borrow from the Supreme Government, the Supreme
Government might say that it is not able to do certain
works, it might plead impecuniosity ; but if on the
other hand the provincial Governments borrowed
money by issuing debentures it would be borrowed
from the public.
18352. Could the provincial Governments borrow at
the same rate of interest as the Government of India ?
—Yes. Every Corporation and Port Trust can do so ;
therefore, a fortiori, they can.
18353. Does the Corporation or the Port Trust
borrow on as advantageous terms as the Government
of India?—Not quite, but I think the provincial
Government would be able to do so.
18354. Would you make any kind of police work
one of the duties of the village panchayat ?—The
panchayat ought to be'a link, as it were, between the
police and the District Magistrate. These panchayats
ought in no way to be subordinate to the police ; they
ought to be at least co-ordinate with them. They
might be entrusted with certain police powers, not all.
For instance, just as there is a legal obligation on the
chaukidars to report some local offences, it might be
made an obligation on the panchayat to give informa-
tion on certain matters.
18355 Barring that, you do not want them to
undertake any other police work?—No.
18356. Otherwise you confine the panchayat entirely
to sanitation, education, and the improvement of their
villages and so on ?'■—Yes.
18357. Would it help the organisation of these
panchayats if a special officer was employed ?—I
think so.
13358. You were Chairman of Berhampore muni-
cipality ; is that not a large town ?—Yes. The
population is about 40,000. I ceased to be Chairman
in 1895.
18359. Was your Vice-Chairman a non-official
gentleman elected by the members ?—Yes.
18360. Did you feel that you had sufficient powers
to carry on all the work of the municipality ?—I think
I had ; the executive authorities perhaps thought that
I had too much power.
18361. Did you have to maintain any schools or
dispensaries in the municipal area ?—Yes, there was
a large dispensary which we supported entirely.
18362. Were the services of the doctor lent by the
Government, while you paid all expenses ?—Yes.
18363. Had you sufficient control over the working
of the dispensary ?—The municipality had not sufficient
control over the dispensary, nor has it now. There is
now a Dispensary Committee.
Balm
Baikunta
Nath Sen.
28 Jan., 1908.
33263
X 2
163
and an Executive Council ; what is your reason for
that?—The Members of the Indian Civil Service
would be under proper control. It is very important
that this control should come from outside.
18331. You might have a Lieutenant-Governor from
outside ; if you had that, would you still want an
Executive Council ?—Yes, the Executive Councils
would be an essential thing to help him in adminis-
tration.
18332. Why do you think that the Head of the
Government requires advisers and colleagues ; is it
because you would get greater continuity of fpolicy ?
—Yes, there would be greater continuity of policy,
and his colleagues would help the Lieutenant-Governor
in duties which he alone could not be expected to
discharge.
18333. You mean you would get several minds look-
ing at the thing instead of one, and possibly a broader
point of view ?—That is my idea.
18334. You are not in favour of Advisory Councils
for District Officers ?—If what I have suggested be
accepted, there will be no necessity for Advisory
Councils.
18335. You would rather have an effective Advisory
Council for the whole province than a number of
small Advisory Councils dotted about all over the
province ?—Yes.
18336. .You might have a conflict of opinion among
the smaller Advisory Councils, and one might be in
conflict with the other?—Yes, and that would give
rise to disorder and difficulties whicln ls ns>t desirable
to introduce into the administration-
18337. If there was a question which provoked a
certain amount of conflict, you might have a number
of conflicting views sent up to the Government, and
the temptation might be to play off one against the
other ?—That is the reason why I suggested that the
central control should be properly representative.
18338. The Local Boards to-day have a certain
amount of money for roads ; do they spend that
money well?—Neither the Local Boards nor the Dis-
trict Boards spend their money well.
18339. Which spends it best ?—I should say it is
better spent by the Local Boards than by the District
Boards.
18340. In the case of the District Board there may
possibly be less supervision and therefore possibly
more leakage—is that what you mean ?—I fear so.
18341. Would that be an argument for giving greater
powers to the Local Boards ?—I think so.
18342. (Mr. Dutt.) You propose to abolish the
Divisional Commissioners and the Board of Revenue
and to substitute an Inspector-General at the head of
each department ? Would you tell us briefly what
would be gained by that arrangement ?—Strictly
speaking, the Board of Revenue as originally con-
stituted has ceased to exist long ago. These officers
are, as it were, channels by which certain reports and
resolutions pass and are recorded. If they did not
exist the members in charge of departments would
receive advice and reports from the Heads of Depart-
ments. Now you have got several steps—first the
District Board, then the Commissioner, then the Board
of Revenue and then the Government ; but according
to my suggestion the Governor with the Council would
get his report from the Head of the Department.
18343. You would do away with a lot of circum-
locution ?—Yes that is the gain ; we should get rid of
circumlocution which causes delay and lengthy writing,
the repetition of despatches and reports, and so forth.
Abbreviate work and secure efficiency—that is my
idea.
18344. Under your system would the administration
be as much in touch with the people as it ought to be,
or is supposed to be now ?—It would certainly be more
so than at present.
18345. One of the duties of the Divisional Commis-
sioner now is to supervise the work of the District
Officers under him ; would that be secured under the
scheme that you have recommended ?—Far more would
be secured ; you cannot expect a Divisional Commis-
sioner to be an expert in all departments; he is
only human. There are so many departments. A
Divisional Commissioner’s inspection cannot always be
very useful and satisfactory, but if these inspections
are made by the Heads of different Departments, that
would be an expert examination.
18346. You do not think that under your system the
administration would be too departmental and not
sufficiently human, too much the administration of
experts and not sufficiently the administration of men
in touch with the people ?—I believe they would be in
touch with the people.
18347. You say that provincial Governments should
have borrowing powers within certain limitations ;
you have not told us for what objects the provincial
Governments should be allowed to borrow ?—For the
improvement of general administration—not for the
construction of residential houses or for the improve-
ment of a ball-room, or anything of that sort.
18348. What do you mean by the improvement of
general administration ?—For irrigation purposes, for
sanitary purposes, or for educational purposes, or for
anything leading to the improvement of the country.
18349. Would you make it a rule that these loans
should be incurred under the sanction of the Govern-
ment of India on each occasion ?—Yes.
18350. At present provincial Governments can
borrow from the Government of India ?—Yes, but I
am not in favour of that.
18351. What is the advantage of the system which
you recommend in comparison with the present system
of the provincial Governments borrowing from the
Government of India ?—If the provincial Governments
borrow from the Supreme Government, the Supreme
Government might say that it is not able to do certain
works, it might plead impecuniosity ; but if on the
other hand the provincial Governments borrowed
money by issuing debentures it would be borrowed
from the public.
18352. Could the provincial Governments borrow at
the same rate of interest as the Government of India ?
—Yes. Every Corporation and Port Trust can do so ;
therefore, a fortiori, they can.
18353. Does the Corporation or the Port Trust
borrow on as advantageous terms as the Government
of India?—Not quite, but I think the provincial
Government would be able to do so.
18354. Would you make any kind of police work
one of the duties of the village panchayat ?—The
panchayat ought to be'a link, as it were, between the
police and the District Magistrate. These panchayats
ought in no way to be subordinate to the police ; they
ought to be at least co-ordinate with them. They
might be entrusted with certain police powers, not all.
For instance, just as there is a legal obligation on the
chaukidars to report some local offences, it might be
made an obligation on the panchayat to give informa-
tion on certain matters.
18355 Barring that, you do not want them to
undertake any other police work?—No.
18356. Otherwise you confine the panchayat entirely
to sanitation, education, and the improvement of their
villages and so on ?'■—Yes.
18357. Would it help the organisation of these
panchayats if a special officer was employed ?—I
think so.
13358. You were Chairman of Berhampore muni-
cipality ; is that not a large town ?—Yes. The
population is about 40,000. I ceased to be Chairman
in 1895.
18359. Was your Vice-Chairman a non-official
gentleman elected by the members ?—Yes.
18360. Did you feel that you had sufficient powers
to carry on all the work of the municipality ?—I think
I had ; the executive authorities perhaps thought that
I had too much power.
18361. Did you have to maintain any schools or
dispensaries in the municipal area ?—Yes, there was
a large dispensary which we supported entirely.
18362. Were the services of the doctor lent by the
Government, while you paid all expenses ?—Yes.
18363. Had you sufficient control over the working
of the dispensary ?—The municipality had not sufficient
control over the dispensary, nor has it now. There is
now a Dispensary Committee.
Balm
Baikunta
Nath Sen.
28 Jan., 1908.
33263
X 2